The Homeschool Journey

Thinking About Music Instruction

One of the things that so many parents appreciate so deeply about Waldorf schools is the way that music is an integral part of the curriculum. From earliest days in the kindergarten as the children sing and clap and play - as their sense for rhythm is nurtured through the very rhythmical order of the days, weeks and seasons  children in Waldorf schools are imbued with the health-giving benefits of music. And "music" here is a very broad word - indeed, Steiner spoke often in terms of the need for a teacher to develop a "musicality" in his teacher. By this Steiner meant harmony, sensitivity, rhythm and fluidity, all essential characteristics of a good teacher and all qualities necessary for every human being to develop.

 

Homeschoolers are usually as keen that their children become musical as any other parent. One thing every homeschooler can consider is Steiner's injunction to "be musical" in one's teaching!

 

Then come thoughts about which musical instrument for a child to learn and at what age. Other issues also arise when thinking about musical instruments.

 

The thing that jumps out at me first is the issue of playing with others and playing alone. In Waldorf classroom, the first and second graders all play together with their teacher - everyone works together, listening to each other, imitating their teacher who stands in front of them and plays as they play. Often, especially nowadays (this wasn't the case when I was a 7 year old in the Waldorf school I attended) they are playing pentatonic flutes - the pentatonic scale is considered to be more "heavenly", more developmentally appropriate for the child than the diatonic scale. And, lastly, when playing a wind instrument such as a recorder, the child IS the instrument, her breath is intimately bound up with the beautiful music which she makes. Steiner repeatedly emphasized how important it was for a child to experience BEING an instrument (singing, is of course, the other way the young child - anyone - can experience this).

 

So when a child plays an instrument such as a piano or violin, he stands alone (I know that nowadays in many Waldorf schools the children ALL take violin and play together so this is a bit different). From a Waldorf point of view, is it developmentally appropriate for the 7 or 8 year old to "stand apart", to "stand alone" in this way? If I think of other parts of the curriculum - drama, for instance - the first and second grader does not yet stand alone. The group recites together and though individual children may act out parts, they don't engage their emergent egos in the same way as they would if they had lines to speak.  So back to a young child playing the piano or violin - might this not be a premature way of making the child separate, making him "stand alone" as it were? This is what I'm thinking about. And I do wonder if those children who have a musical gift, who are begging for lessons, might need in fact to start this early - but that for the other children, those who will hopefully gain some skill and joy from playing an instrument but who do not have a particular gift, might be better served to wait until 9.

Is She Ready to Read or Not?

Something that is very important to ponder is the difference between teaching a child who is not ready for something and allowing a strong impulse in a child to unfold. I would hope that no parent who is interested in the healing benefits of Waldorf education would ever teach their tiny child how to read or write - but equally, would also hope that if they had a small one with an overwhelming desire to read that they would never prevent it. By that I mean take away books or pencils or say "no".

However, the danger that I often see with parents is the assumption that once a child shows an interest in something like writing that the parent assumes a certain progression and that "this is it - she is starting to read". If a 3 or 4 year old show interest in reading, it may well be that they want to spell their names or the names of people significant to them. They might want to read signs and the writing on a cereal box. But this does not mean that it's time to teach them their letters or to get out the readers! My almost 25 years experience with children in many different realms tells me that they do not, by and large, learn in a linear fashion. Learning takes place in cycles and in fits and starts -the elegance of homeschooling is that we can recognize these patterns and adjust our expectations to them. Then homeschooling becomes a case of shaping the curriculum to fit the child - and not the other way around.

Many, many tiny children go through a phase of wanting to read and/or write. If the parent remains neutral about it - giving them paper or spelling out words for them or writing things for them ONLY AS THEY REQUEST!! - then most children are satisfied and for a great many of them, the phase passes. Some might return to an interest when the parent introduces academic work in first grade. Others might take a few more years to become interested again.

And, of course, there are a number of children who teach themselves to read at 4 or 5. That's fine, too. Again, I would just leave it - neither encouraging nor discouraging. If this reading carries on I would still - perhaps especially! - recommend that one continue with a kindergarten routine - that no formal teaching or formal reading time be part of the kindergarten routine. If the child reads on her own - that's fine. She will need the support of the extra emphasis on nurturing her senses, strengthening her physical organism by powerful rhythms in the home environment and making sure that her head is not simply leading her body along. What one does not want is a child that burns out.

And that is the danger. It is not simply because Steiner said these things because he felt like it. He observed the effect of intellectual head-orientated work on the physical organism of the child and based his recommendations on that. He saw that the child until about 6 1/2 is busy making up his own physical form and "coming into" (incarnating for those of you who can deal with that term) his body and needed his life energy as it were ( the etheric forces that Steiner talks about) to be free to build a healthy vessel for the soul and for the later intellectual powers to enfold.

And we can see the effect of early intellectualism all around us - overstimulated, choice-burdened, early taught children who burn out at 9 or 10 and refuse to read, refuse to go to school, are put on medication, become apathetic or hyper.... the list goes on and on.

So I would say it's not a matter of "imposing" something on a child - no more than I think of it as imposing on my child that they can't eat too much sugar or that they can't run out into the traffic. Sometimes as parents we need, out of our experience and knowledge, to oppose something our child might seem to be interested in. Or - and I would say this is more often the case - intuit into what he is expressing, hear behind his words or actions and help meet his needs in a developmentally appropriate way. So much about learning to be a part of this world, of growing up has to do with health. For me this is the greatest power of Waldorf education - a way to understand the child and to enfold him in a way of parenting and educating that enhances his potential to be healthy - in mind, body and spirit.

I write in great length about this in my language arts book for those who are interested. Many of the audio downloads have a lot about these issues as well within a larger discussion of, for instance, kindergarten or first grade.

4th Grade Man & Animal Block

(Here is a reworked post from my old yahoo group which has since been replaced with a new Forum. We were discussing Steiner's book Kingdom of Childhood and this is part of that discussion)

 

 

This business about the relationship between animals and the Human Being is incredibly complex... I recently have had two telephone consultations with people advising them about the 4th grade Man & Animal block and telling them that this is probably THE most esoteric main lesson in all 12 years of the Waldorf curriculum! And here, in this lecture are some of the indications for this!

OK - where to start.... Part of me wants to say "well, you just have to read "Theosophy" and "Occult Science" to understand this.... as if all of us who have read those books really "get" it!! And, of course that wouldn't be a particularly helpful or friendly thing to say anyway! So I won't say it....!!!

So... instead I will say that this has to do with the anthroposophical ideas around spiritual evolution and the relationships between the different Kingdoms on Earth. In other words, one can see that a difference between the Plant and Mineral worlds is that the former have
life processes (etheric bodies), growth and so on. Yet there is certainly a Mineral element in the Plant kingdom. Next we have the Animal Kingdom and the Plant Kingdom - a difference here is that the Animals have feelings and are sentient (astral body) - yet there are certainly Plant and Mineral elements in the Animal Kingdom. Finally we come to the Human Being - the Human Being has something that these others do not have - an "I" or Ego (this term is used somewhat differently in anthroposophy than in psychology). But, of course, the Human Being also has elements in common, sheaths as it were, from these other Kingdoms. (and this is all very abbreviated and simplified).

So all four kingdoms are related - and there is also a hierarchy in terms of growth, in terms of spiritual development - and in anthroposophical terms this doesn't stop at Man - it carries on into the realms of angelic beings - but we don't need to go into that here!!

Thus the Human Being can be seen, in one sense, as the culmination of the other Kingdoms, and most obviously (as they are the closest) of the Animal Kingdom.

Back to the Man & Animal block - and to some of what's in this Lecture - the point is that the Animals are one-sided, are specialists. The fleetness of foot of the deer, the courage of the horse, the sense of smell of the dog - no Human Being comes near to these abilities - but the Human has something of each - plus is an "I" and can therefore use these senses how s/he wishes, is not subject merely to the pull of instinct, as is generally the case with animals. A beautiful explanation of this comes in 5th grade - when one studies the myth of Prometheus and Epimetheus. The latter gave all the "goodies" away to the animals - bravery, thick fur, keen eyesight - only the dregs were left when Prometheus came to give out something to Man. So instead he went and stole Fire from the Gods... and then paid dearly for it. Well... what is fire? The Divine Spark, the Light within , the I. When one studies Man & Animal in 4th grade and brings this picture of the animals having these qualities and the Human having something more... and then tells that myth in 5th grade - well, I've seen the "wow" look come across children's faces when they have an experience like that... One does not point it out, one lets it dawn out of the child's own soul.

Back to the subject at hand... another important element here is that, according to Steiner, the role of the Human Being is to one day develop to being a Co-Creator - the Human Being is ultimately as bound up with the Destiny of the Earth as Her destiny is with his (ours). Last night I was reading an interview with Barry Lopez and was sad to read where he said that "the world has no interest in the triumph of Homo Sapiens"... He was putting this in the context of those fundamentalist Christians who have taken the word "domain" (as in "man will have dominion over the earth") to somehow mean domination, destruction, an uncaring attitude toward the Earth. And so I could understand what he was saying. But it was sad to me because, as an anthroposophist, I see this as stemming (in part) from an incorrect understanding of that term - the root of "domain" is house - and we don't want to destroy our house, we want to protect and steward it. Animals, plants even minerals are our Brothers and Sisters - we have them in us, and it is our role to take care of them. And Earth is our Mother, the wise Gaia-Sophia who teaches us and who responds to our actions, good and bad.

Original or Copied Work?

One of the perennial questions asked to teachers at Waldorf schools is "Why do the children all paint the same pictures? Why don't you leave them free to draw or paint whatever they want?" Such questions usually arise after a cursory glance round a first or second grade classroom where a wall might be covered in the class' paintings of a scene from a fairy tale. The questioner has only looked quickly at the pictures and seen similar figures and colors and drawn the conclusion that all the pictures are the same. Had he or she looked more closely, she would have discovered that each picture is different - this child used more red, overwhelming the blue; this child used so much water that the colors are faint, almost washed out; this child painted with a dry brush, giving a harsh and bright feel to the painting; and so on. And of course, to the children, each picture is completely different - no child gets his picture confused with that of another!

 

Having said that, there is, of course, similarity because the children have been told to copy what the teacher painted. Herein lies the unspoken words beneath the question - this is unfree. There is no individual expression here.

 

Waldorf education is based on a sophisticated understanding of child development, one that takes not only the physical and intellectual sides of the child into account, but addresses his emotional and spiritual needs as well. One small piece of this is the understanding that young children learn by imitation - it is their natural way of apprenticing into the world (see other entries on this blog for more on this). Imitation is at its height in about the 5th year - but it is still strong in a 6 or 7 year old and vestiges remain in an 8 year old. By 9, as the child moves through the 9 year change and experiences an awakening of selfhood, imitation fades.

 

And so in the early grades, the teacher does and the children follow. The teacher gestures, speaks, plays, works, draws, paints etc etc - and the children do as she does.  They are laying a foundation, a template as it were, a basis on which to stand.  Each chiod will bring something of himself, of his individuality to what he is learning (thus the discernable differences in the paintings) but he will, nonetheless, share a basis with his classmates. They are collecting information, taking in skills, modeling behaviors. And when they are old enough to become truly conscious of their selves in relation to their surroundings (ie starting at about 9) they then can move away from  copying and start to become involved in real and meaningful choices.

 

The crucial point here, is that without laying these foundations, the children then have little or nothing to stand upon when it is time for them to actually begin to stand apart from adults (parents and teachers). Without the moral guidance of boundaries and the picture images of right and wrong from stories; without the language skills learned from repetition and rhythm such as singing and circle games; without such skills as drawing, painting and other arts, they then have to learn these things anew. They are at a huge disadvantage as they then need to struggle to consciously learn what they should have been given as a gift while they were not yet conscious.

 

Back to artistic work such as drawing or painting, one can clearly see the advantages of such an approach. By allowing the children to copy the teacher's work and thus build up their skills, confidence and aesthetic sensibilities. one gently ushers each child into a world where all human beings are creative and artistic - not just a select few. No 5 year old says "I can't draw" out of himself - he has acquired this attitude from somewhere else if it rears its ugly head. All children accept their ability to draw and paint - and by working with their inborn proclivity for imitation, one can build up this acceptance into the years when a child becomes self aware and starts to judge himself by what others achieve.

 

And certainly, some children have a gift for drawing or painting (or a myriad of other things). That's fine. But the point is that by allowing children to copy an adult's artistic work and to build this foundation of knowledge which he can create because he can copy, then it is far more likely that that child will not give up if he is one who does not possess a gift for art. Have a look at the main lesson books of older Waldorf students and you will see a clear example of what I am talking about. All the books will be beautiful and artistic - some will be real works of art, some will leave something to be desired, but all will be expressions of the student's creative powers. And that is the gift which we wish our children to carry into the world - the belief and knowledge that they are creative human beings.

Waldorf Education and Social Renewal

Back in January (2006) I was able to attend a weekend workshop on Waldorf Education and Social Renewal  at the City of Lakes Waldorf School in Minneapolis, hosted by the Novalis Institute and featuring Gary Lamb of the Institute for Social Renewal.

I first met Gary when our family lived (briefly) in Harlemville, NY about 9 years ago, and subsequently subscribed to the magazine which he co-edited, The Threefold Review (the Institute for Social Renewal has a few articles from the magazine, which is no longer published, up on their website). I always appreciated Gary's clarity and  in particular his clearly articulated position that government should not rightfully be in the business of providing education and that Waldorf education is best served by steering clear of the State.

Gary has dedicated himself to exploring the apparent conundrum of having Waldorf education be both indepedent of the State and accessible to all. This was an important part of what Gary had to say during this weekend. Towards the end of the weekend Gary pointed to Educational Tax Credits as a practical step toward this goal. He is personally involved with the campaign in New York State to create such a possibility (see www.teachnys.org). The picture to the right shows Gary with Patrice Maynard of AWSNA - the Association of Waldorf Schools of N. America. (This is taken from a report about the tax credit campaign in the latest issue of the Institute for Social Renewal's e-mail newsletter: subscribe here).

So, Gary's essential thesis was that Waldorf education originated in and cannot be separated from "social renewal". He talked about the founding of the first Waldorf school in Stuttgart, Germany in 1919 for the children of the Waldorf-Astoria cigarette factory workers and developed a discussion of Rudolf Steiner's views of social renewal and his conceptualization of the threefold nature of human society, whereby a healthy balance is found between the economic life (keyword: fraternity, brother/sisterhood), the political/legal life (keyword: equality) and the 'spiritual-cultural' sphere (keyword: freedom). Following Steiner, Gary firmly placed education in the spiritual-cultural sphere (along with art, science and religion) and described the need for all education to be free from the control of both economic forces (primarily big business) and political forces (the State) - not just Waldorf education.

Gary described a positive role for the State in ensuring the right of all children to an education but he feels that we badly need to unhook that concept from the idea of the State providing education through government schools. Similarly businesses have a part to play in funding education but only in the context of educators (in the classroom) having the authority to decide what the children they are working with need.

I thought that Gary was really inspiring when he described Steiner's view of Waldorf education (or, really, any true education) as constantly evolving, depending upon the changing needs and nature, not of the government or business, but of children. Steiner essentially said that if one is teaching exactly the same way one taught even five years ago one is not meeting the real human beings in front of one. This is why state-mandated curricula and standards are a nonsense.

Robert Karp, who had come all the way from Milwaukee, suggested that modern children's paramount need might be an education that has a therapeutic nature and that this side of Waldorf education may need to be further developed and emphasized.

There were a couple of us Waldorf homeschoolers present at the workshop. Laurel pointed out that homeschooling very much stands in the stream of education independent of state control, though I expressed concern that 'virtual academies' and 'home-based' public school initiatives represented a dangerous blurring of the line between homeschooling and state-controlled education. (This is why Christopherus Homeschool Resources signed the 'We Stand for Homeschooling' resolution a couple of years ago.)

Gary described a situation - the latest step being No Child Left Behind - of increasingly centralized and big business-driven public education. While Gary chose during this weekend not to address the issue of Waldorf Charter schools and 'Waldorf methods' public education, it was clear that he feels this is not the time to compromise on the ideal of education free from political control.

Gary also had interesting things to say about the governance of Waldorf schools in relation to threefolding. He feels that most of the serious problems in the Waldorf schools in the US are issues of the middle, 'rights' sphere (justice, fairness and how things are done) rather than problems of pedagogy or funding. However, he did say that the struggle to adequately fund Waldorf schools is a big strain as well.

I was left with questions around 'social renewal' in the 21st century. Although basic social inequality still exists as it did in 1919 it is now generally accepted that all children deserve an education worthy of a human being (even if one considers that public education doesn't provide that), which was one of Steiner's foundational principles in creating the Waldorf school (as was the co-education of boys and girls which is now also the general rule). Perhaps we can say that in all areas of social life we need creative, free-thinking and compassionate individuals and that Waldorf is precisely working to that end in the education of young people.

I was also left wondering how his model of intersecting spheres within a Waldorf school related to our high school in Viroqua, the Youth Initiative High School, with its much greater level of student participation in governance than in other Waldorf schools.

-- Paul

Report from Informed Family Life Conference Boulder CO

I just got back from Rahima Baldwin's "Whole Family, Whole Parent" conference sponsored by her organization, Informed Family Life. What a great weekend it was!

 

I had the privilege of being one of four keynote speakers. The three people preceding me spoke on fascinating subjects (please go to www.waldorfinthehome.org for more information about the conference and to purchase cd's of these talks), mainly to do with supporting and nurturing the growth and potential of modern children. At first I was daunted by the prospect of having to follow these amazing speakers (including Eugene Schwartz who is just terrific) but then realized I was actually in a wonderful position. My subject was the art of homemaking - and I soon realized that I could bring many themes from their talks into mine as I put forward the suggestion that the home is the best place to truly nurture and care for each family member. So that was really exciting. It felt wonderful to be able to bring together the conference in that way through my talk.

 

I also gave three workshops - one on being at home with under 7's, another on Waldorf and unschooling and a third on language arts. Each was very enjoyable and it was gratifying to see people who hadn't signed up for the latter workshops returning for more and crowding into the room! These talks were not recorded but I have audio downloads available from my web site www.christopherushomeschool.org on the first two topics. There are also a number of blog entries here on language arts - as well as homemaking - which people might like to read!

 

So the workshops and the keynotes were a joy to present. And, even better, it was lovely to connect and reconnect with so many people! There were familiar faces from other conferences, either my own or from Boulder in the past. And there were several people that I knew only as voices from telephone consultations or as e-mail names on my yahoo group! That was really fun to meet them and to see how wrong my mental images of what they looked like were! Another highlight was going out on the Friday evening into the Rocky Mountains with Barbara Dewey - she and I had spoken about doing this for several years and we finally got to do it. We drove an hour out into those beautiful mountains and stuffed ourselves silly at a amazing German restaurant. Sauerbraten - yum! She and I spent a lot of time together during the conference. She is a wonderful person, with great warmth and humor. I intend to write a review of her "Geometry with 6th Graders" booklet here at some point - might as well give it a little plug now. It is a very good resource for a subject which is often hard for parents to fathom.

 

I believe the Conference was a success - Rahima seemed pleased by the numbers and by the enthusiasm of the participants and presenters. There were a few grumbles about food shortages on the Saturday but all in all, people did seem pleased by the Conference as a whole. An ecological waste company offered its resources to the conference with the aim of making it a zero waste event. I don't know if this was successful, but it certainly was a great goal to shoot for.

 

 

Defending Oak Meadow

(here is a post from my yahoo group, Waldorf At Home which I wrote about Oak Meadow)

 

I think there is much to recommend OM and I also have found useful information in reading some of their materials - as I have found useful information from the likes of Charlotte Mason, John Holt and Maria Montessori.

 

But being holistic and respecting the child, while being characteristic of Waldorf are not solely hallmarks of Waldorf - the same characteristics could be said to be hallmarks of the educational philosophies founded by the people I mention above. But Montessori, CM and unschooling, whilst all sharing a few characteristics with Waldorf are, at essence, planets away. And this is not (necessarily!! - grin!) a value judgment - it is a statement of fact in terms of the grounding of these educational approaches and their very different foundational cores.

Likewise, OM, although founded by Waldorf teachers - and so having a few small things in common with Waldorf - is not, at essence, Waldorf.  And despite some people's reluctance to define Waldorf out of fear of perhaps sounding dogmatic, it is entirely possible to  say "what is Waldorf"! One can easily identify things about Waldorf pedagogy which are clearly discernible and which do not feature in Oak Meadow.

Again - this does not mean that by using OM someone forever loses any karmic Waldorf cred they might have ever had or might ever earn in future!! I , for one, have used all sorts of things - and adapted them as I see fit. One could imagine a model Waldorf homeschooler (you all do realize I'm being playful here I hope!!) who uses no Waldorf curric of any shape or kind! She might be able, out of her own relationship to anthroposophy and to Waldorf to be able to create a wonderful Waldorf homeschool for her children! So it's not the materials themselves, necessarily, which determine whether one is really working deeply - or at all - with Waldorf.  In all my publications I repeatedly stress where I think things from Waldorf might or might not be easily adapted at home and give suggestions for how one might do that.  And I often suggest materials that are not Waldorf in the slightest.  Further, I also list OM as a possible resource for people to use so that they can truly create the homeschool they want.

So for me, this is not a matter of purity - it is a matter of clarity. For instance: OM  use form drawing, but do not put it into a proper context (which could only be done with a clear explanation of Waldorf pedagogy). One is therefore left with a very shallow and misleading relationship to this therapeutic art. Again, in the kindergarten book there is a paragraph where Steiner is actually mentioned - but misleadingly so, leaving one with the impression that he advocated teaching letters in kindergarten!So there are these fragments of Waldorf  - but no summary of their relationship to Waldorf is printed in the books or in their catalogue so parents who are looking for Waldorf buy OM thinking they have found it. This is what I have a problem with. If parents buy and use OM because they like it, because it's right for them - and know that it's not Waldorf but that's fine with them - then that's wonderful!

So for me the point is not "Is OM a holistic curric?" or not - it clearly, in its own way, is. And that's fine. But it has this unclear relationship to Waldorf which is not explained - and although one might be able to find articles like the one posted on their web site which give something of their background, there is no clarity about this either in their catalog or in the books themselves - or at least not the many volumes from the grades which I have looked at. And for me the problem is that parents are left thinking that OM is a Waldorf curriculum when it is clearly not.

 

Lastly, the fact that Oak Meadow has recently cheerfully embraced an on-line format means that they have more clearly broken whatever tenuous links that have had with Waldorf.  I can't see how anyone could say that they are "doing Waldorf" and use an on-line curriculum - even with high school students! I would, of course, like to give OM the benefit of the doubt and hope that the materials on the computer are for the parents, not for the students. I am interested in hearing people's experience of this.

 

 

Form Drawing

(the following are two posts from our yahoo group, Waldorf At Home on the topic of form drawing).

 

How to explain..... form drawing is like water, it is like the movement of plants as they grow, it is like the forms snowflakes make.... Form drawing is about a moment of movement caught on a page. It is about concentration , perseverance, control of the will, grace and purposefulness.

 

Form drawing is a therapeutic art practiced in all Waldorf schools usually from first through 4th grade (after that geometric drawing somewhat takes its place).  It is not worked with in kindergaten because it is too "waking up" - it calls for a mindfulness that kindergarteners, who are still in the state of consciousness that keeps them "at one" with the world should not be asked to have. In first grade it usually precedes writing (which precedes reading) not so much because it improves handwriting (which is a nice by-product and not the aim of form drawing) but because it calls up the inner discipline the child needs to work beautifully and skilfully within the confines of a page. It helps a child learn about boundaries - and about many other things as well.

 

When one does form drawing one needs to be aware of one's surroundings, think ahead where one is going with a form, control what one's crayon or pencil is doing, and relax into the movement of the form. It is a profoundly healing art. Anyone can do form drawing and  one should start at the beginning. So an older child or an adult should really start  with the first forms and progress through them. I explain all this in my form drawing book and lay out many guidelines, tips and ideas for how to proceed. Please go to the Bookstore page of the Christopherus web site to look at my book to get an idea of what's in there. On the "Homeschooler's Work" page on my web site there are also several lovely examples of form drawings done by homeschooled children.

 

(In another post, a list member asked about doing form drawing with her third grader, who was resistent to the idea of form drawing).

 

In my work I often suggest to people that they work "homeopathically" with children, starting with what is present and trying to ennoble it - not opposing it with something different.So why don't you and your daughter spend some time watching water move or leaves fall - and draw what you and she see. Let her experiment with  how nature does form drawing - currents, ripples, streams etc. Do non directed form drawing for a while, that which is called for by nature. Let the power of your child's observation - and her desire to do what is true and beautiful, find expression in a way that takes it out of the potential head-to-head conflict with you. Work sideways (there's mantra number three for Christopherus, closely following "not school at home" and "homeschooling is about family"!). Don't get into her stuff or into an unnecessary conflict.

Then let form drawing rest for a while. Do none for a time. When you judge the time is right,  spend some time talking about the forms in nature that you two drew and then perhaps let her look through your form drawing book for a for a form that reminds her of the water (or leaves). Let her copy it - and if she's still being a tricky customer, let her copy it directly out of the book - otherwise, I'd suggest you do it in the usual way with you drawing it large on the board and then her copying. Maybe recite a verse about water or leaves while she works - (though some children would prefer not to have a verse, would prefer to remain in the memory of what they experienced in nature) let her work with it in her own way. This might just help break any stalemate that could be forming over this issue between you two. And, assuming all goes well (??!!!) you can see what to do next - "Here's a more complicated form - let's try this".

 

What is Waldorf?

Several people have contacted me recently, in private, expressing their concern that a number of individuals are setting themselves up as "Waldorf consultants" or sellers of Waldorf curriculum and that the relationship of these people to Waldorf is unclear. How to know what Waldorf really is?

 

This is a tricky question. As I say repeatedly in several of my books, Waldorf education is something which has been developed for a school situation. So as soon as one goes beyond the confines of a school and out into the wonderfully nebulous (and rightly so) world of homeschooling, then it can be very complicated indeed!

 

Back to the school situation, even there it can be far from clear. A good case in point is the high school where I work part time. It has a definite relationship to Waldorf education - we use a main lesson form, we teach Parzival and other classic Waldorf high school main lessons and there are real efforts to integrate a head, heart and hands approach.

 

But for me, none of those things in themselves make for a Waldorf school. We could even take the schedule, reading list and whatever else straight from a Waldorf high school like the one in Austin, Texas or Chicago, Illinois and it still wouldn't - in my book - be a Waldorf school.

 

For me, what makes a Waldorf school is the living intention of the faculty to work out of anthroposophy and to actively engage with what lies behind the forms, ie, with the pedagogy. Just to lighten that slightly, I should hasten to add that not all of the faculty would need to meet this requirement - but that there would be a College of Teachers who is trusted with the spiritual path of the school itself as an entity and that they work earnestly and deeply with the anthroposophy that informs their pedagogical decisions. Which could even mean that Parzival is not taught, that there are no main lessons - and so on.  It might very well be that the forms a faculty comes up with bear very little relationship to what has been done before. And that's exciting! (As I sidenote, I should also mention that AWSNA - the Association of Waldorf Schools of North America - has trademarked the title "Waldorf". Only schools and in-home childcare that have a relationship with them are allowed to use this label. This is because Waldorf is something - it has an identity, an integrity of its own. It is not whatever anyone wants to make of it!)

 

And how much more important would this spirit of creativity and of truly penetrating a child's needs be to a homeschooler! Who knows what each of us comes up with - and as homeschoolers we must be free to do whatever we think is best for our family. This of course means that much of what we do will not be at all like what is done in a Waldorf school (see my blog entry But is it Waldorf? ) - and that's great. And we can call ourselves Waldorf or Sort of Waldorf or Quasi Waldorf or Nothing At All. Whose business is it anyway?!

 

Certainly not mine! And many things I've done and many things I've advised people who consult with me and many things I suggest in my books might seem to be very far removed from Waldorf! But what I think I can, in truth, say, is that it arises out of who I am in terms of my life expereice with children and with Waldorf education. And, as part of that, with my studies as an anthroposophist.

 

To return to people who wish to sell their services labeled Waldorf, I  would need to ask : Why? What makes it Waldorf? And I would need to look carefully for indications that the person's work arises from an understanding of what lies beneath the curriculum and the particular orientation toward children.   I would also want to know about this person's experience with children other than her own. Has she led Waldorf toddler groups or taught in a Waldorf classroom? Does she run Waldorf educational programs? How does she know what might be good for a child other than her own? And how is this knowledge based in a Waldorf perspective? What is this person's life history? What is her relationship to Waldorf education - does it go beyond reading and into practical everyday application, not just in her own home but  in other situations? And has she truly penetrated not just Waldorf, but what underlies it? Thus, I would need to look for a relationship to anthroposophy.

 

Otherwise we are left with materials that might, for instance,  value unstructured play and no early academics - but that in itself does not mean it would be Waldorf. There are plenty of people from all sorts of educational backgrounds who might advocate many things in common with Waldorf - but that doesn't make them Waldorf!

 

And this might be just fine! I certainly have been influenced by some amazing people who have never heard of Waldorf (or think it's a salad) but who, out of their own integrity and deep experience with children have taught me many profound lessons. Or, on a simpler level, I have certainly happily purchased curriculum materials that were in no way Waldorf - but were inspiring or beautiful or fun or whatever! This is not about purity!

 

What it is about is clarity. I do not set myself up as a judge of what people do or don't do in their homeschools. But as a consultant I hear the refrain "I wish I had known before" so many times!  They say this often in regard to materials they have purchased or advice they were given. And so I put this blog entry out not to take a Holier Than Thou perspective but to share my thoughts with people on this subject so that they are better informed. And that is my business.

Composition - when?

Many people ask when is a child old enough/ready to write on his own. The following are some of my thoughts on this, based on a discussion with someone about her 9 year old and writing.....

 

If a child is not developmentally ready to do creative or independent writing, then asking him or her to do so can be an incredibly frustrating experience for that child. It's like people who get little ones to keep journals - how boring is it to keep writing what one had for breakfast?! A 9 year old is only just starting to separate, to stand on his own two feet - to go through that famous 9 year change spoken about in Waldorf circles.  If a child is encouraged to write too soon then he or she can wind up feeling that s/he has nothing worthwhile to say and that writing is a waste of time. How exciting it is to witness a child blossom into  a writer when she is ready!

 

By 12 or 13, the child is becoming an adolescent - is able to be somewhat reflective as she considers life and her experiences, has a stronger (and sometimes overpowering!) sense of self - it is out of this that creative writing flows. One has to be fluid in time, comfortable with living into the imagined thoughts of another, able to imagine a variety of situations, to be able to write out of oneself in a creative way - to make up stories that have substance, to imagine into different endings for characters.

 

Steiner recommended that when children begin to do their own composition at about 9 or 10 that they write about what IS. So examples of that can be simple (and some children will really go far with this) descriptions of say, a trip to the woods or a description of the cat. At 12 or 13 the child might start entering sympathetically into different historical characters (in my Roman history unit study, forinstance, I give several examples where a student could write about witnessing the murder of Julius Caesar or imagine being a soldier crossing the Alps with Hannibal etc etc).

 

By 14 or 15 the student should be able to write objectively (as I am teaching my social studies students at the Waldorf high school where I teach - I am constantly having to say to them "Your opinion is fine - but it must not be confused with facts!!") and really be comfortable working with various genres of creative writing and poetry.

 

So back to a 9 year old - I would really focus in having him copy what you write - whether it is your own well written composition or something (verses, quotations etc) from others. By doing this you are laying a firm foundation which he can then base his own future writing on. You will know when he is ready to write his own things - he will demand it!